Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Planning Commission - 11/30/1994 V MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS - CITY HALL NOVEMBER 30, 1994 - 6 :30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Lamont Taylor, Chairman Robert Canales, Vice Chairman Michael Bertuzzi Laurie Cook Ralph Hall Alma Meinrath Danny Noyola Sylvia Perez Richard Serna STAFF PRESENT: Brandol M. Harvey, AIA, AICP, Director of Planning and Development Marcia Cooper, Recording Secretary Michael Gunning, Sr. Planner Norbert Hart, Assistant City Attorney Mic Raasch, AICP, City Planner CALL TO ORDER Chairman Taylor called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. , and described the procedure to be followed. He stated that the Amendments to Dune Protection and Beach Access Plan and Regulations will be heard after Tabled Zoning and Plats. PUBLIC HEARING NEW ZONINGS Dave Chavvell: 1194-2 REQUEST: From "RE" Residential Estate District to "B-3" Business District on 0.69 acre out of Lot 8, Section 41, Flour Bluff and Encinal Farm and Garden Tracts, located approximately 500 feet south of South Padre Island Drive and 1, 530 feet west of Flour Bluff Drive. Mr. Gunning described the land use and zoning in the surrounding area, and stated that the applicant is requesting a zoning change to "B-3" Business District to continue operating the mini-storage facility. The property is currently occupied by a mini-storage facility. Mr. Gunning summarized the Staff Report, informing the Commission of applicable Policy Statements, and quoted from the Flour Bluff Area Development Plan. SCANNED %. 'S Planning Commission Meeting November 30, 1994 Page 2 The original mini-storage facility was built in 1972 on Lot 15. Lot 15 fronts on and accesses only South Padre Island Drive. The mini-storage expansion was completed around 1982 on an unplatted piece of property adjacent to the rear of Lot 15. Building Division records indicate that no permits were issued for the expansion. In August 1994, the Planning Commission approved the applicant's plat, encompassing all of the mini-storage development. The mini-storage use on Lot 15 is a permitted use in the existing "B-3" District. Individual storage unite are limited by ordinance to one (1) story and 300 square feet. Approval of a "B-3" District on the subject property would continue these limitations. Although the existing mini-storage units on the subject property complies with the height and area restrictions for each unit, they do not meet the 10 foot setback required for non- residential structures adjacent to residentially zoned properties. The subject property is adjacent to a "RE" Residential Estate District on the south, east, and west sides. This "RE" zoned area remains undeveloped with the only access being a private road. Access from the subject property to the residential area is prohibited, which further reduces any adverse impact on the residentially zoned area. If the zoning is approved, the applicant must also comply with the required 10 foot setback and screening fence along the south, east, and west property lines. The requested "B-3" District is a high intensity district that should be located along a major thoroughfare. It is also a district that allows uses such as auto sales lots, auto repair garages, bars with or without food service, and other similar uses. These types of uses are generally incompatible when adjacent to residentially zoned areas. In considering the rezoning to "B-3" and its adjacency to an undeveloped residentially zoned tract, it should be noted that the original mini-storage facility and the subsequent expansion is a low-intensity use that has been at this location for the past 24 and 12 years, respectively. The adjacent area is zoned for large residential estates (minimum lot size -1 acre) which makes the mini-storage less objectionable than if it were adjacent to a standard single-family subdivision. Mr. Gunning read to the Commission the pros and cons of this application from the Staff Report (copy on file) . Seven notices were mailed, one was returned in favor and none in opposition. Staff recommends approval. Mr. Chuck Urban, Urban Engineering, appeared representing the applicant. He stated that he concurs with Staff' s recommendation, and offered to answer any questions. it 1880 Planning Commission Meeting November 30, 1994 Page 3 No one appeared in opposition, and the public hearing was declared closed. Motion by Cook, seconded by Perez that this application for "B-3" Business District be forwarded to the City Council with the recommendation that it be approved. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Harvey stated that Application 1194-4 Pete Cicacci has been pulled from the Agenda. This zoning application will be rescheduled for the December 14, 1994 meeting. Albertson' s Inc. : 1194-3 REQUEST: From "A-1" Apartment House District and "B-1" Neighborhood Business District with a Special Permit to "B-4" General Business District on Casa Linda Estates Unit 4, Block 10, Lots 1 through 5, Block A, Lot 2, and Block AR, located along South Staples Street, Kostoryz Road, and Orlando Drive. Mr. Gunning described the land use and zoning in the surrounding area, and stated that the applicant is requesting"B-4" General Business District zoning to develop a retail center. The property is currently occupied by apartments and a vacant retail building. Mr. Gunning summarized the Staff report, informing the Commission of applicable Policy Statements. Albertson' s, Inc. , the applicant and prospective purchaser, proposes to redevelop an 8.07 acre site located along two arterial frontages - South Staples Street and Kostoryz Road - as a retail center. The site is currently occupied by a single-story 44, 800 square foot retail building facing Kostoryz Road and two rows of two-story apartments that face South Staples Street. The commercial building, formerly known as Gibson's, and most recently the Casa Linda Flea Market, and the apartments are to be demolished. The present zoning consists of approximately six (6) acres zoned a "B-1" Neighborhood Business District with a Special Permit, and two (2) acres zoned an "A-1" Apartment House District. The proposed development includes four (4) one-story retail buildings ranging in size from 2, 500 square feet to 51, 000 square feet. Two (2) structures, which includes the 51, 000 square foot building, face South Staples Street, and the two remaining buildings front Kostoryz Road. Although the applicant has indicated that only one (1) freestanding shopping center sign for each street frontage is desired, the requested "B-4" zoning permits an unlimited number and height of signs when located behind the twenty (20) foot front yard setback. \w. 'S Planning Commission Meeting November 30, 1994 Page 4 The subject property, besides bordering two (2) arterial streets along the north and west sides, also fronts a local residential street on the south, Orlando Drive, and a single-family subdivision to the east. The areas to the south, across Orlando Drive, and west, across Rostoryz Road, are also developed with single-family residences. Residences to the south side-up onto Orlando Drive, while the residences to the west back up to Rostoryz Road. City policies state that high-intensity commercial areas should have direct access to arterials. The subject property accesses two (2) adjacent arterials. The policy further states that traffic should not traverse low-density residential areas. The development plan indicates removal of the two (2) existing driveways on Orlando Drive, and no new access provided. Another City policy states that when commercial uses develop adjacent to residential areas, the commercial development should be sensitive to the residences by providing greater building setbacks, screening fences, and/or additional landscaping. The recently approved plat indicates a thirty (30) foot building setback from the residential area to the east, larger than the required ten (10) feet. The proposed site plan also indicates a six (6) foot tall screening fence along the common property line with the residential area. Some landscaping may be provided along the screening fence. With the proposed closure of the driveways to Orlando Drive, the additional setback from residences and the screening fence and landscaping to buffer the residences, the requested "3-4" District and proposed development would have minimal adverse impact to the surrounding neighborhood area. There are no absolute assurances that the applicant must exceed the required minimum development standards for setbacks and driveways as they have proposed. Under a straight forward rezoning to "H-4" , uses such as bars, taverns, nightclubs, and automotive uses are considered inconsistent with residential neighborhoods would be permitted. Mr. Gunning read to the Commission the pros and cone of this application from the Staff Report (copy on file) . Forty one notices were mailed, seven were returned in favor and none in opposition. Staff recommends approval. Mr. Tony Callaway, Dallas, Texas, appeared for the applicant and stated that they requested "13-4" zoning to allow them to redevelop the entire area for a shopping center. He stated that some concerns from the community are screening on Orlando Street. Albertson's proposes a landscape buffer, landscape setback and landscaped screen. He noted that a screening fence will also be provided along the rear property line, and substantial landscaping in accordance with the Landscape Ordinance. Albertson's will provide 150 jobs, some of which will be on a part-time basis. fir J Planning Commission Meeting November 30, 1994 Page 5 In answer to a question from Commissioner Serna, Mr. Callaway indicated that other stores on the property would typically be a fast food restaurant or a small retail neighborhood oriented store. At this time they do not have anyone committed to the stores. Commissioner Serna was concerned about allowing "B-4" zoning which could accommodate bars and taverns. Mr. Harvey responded that "8-4" zoning would allow restaurants that could serve alcohol, and bars which serve food, and bars which do not serve food. Mr. Callaway indicated that if it is the Planning Commission' s desire to restrict bars and taverns from being established on the property, they would not have a problem with that. He added that Albertson's would sell beer in the store, but a bar or tavern would not be compatible with their use. In answer to a question from Chairman Taylor, Mr. Callaway indicated that the owner of the apartments is responsible for notifying the apartments residents, once the zoning is approved. Mr. Kenneth Gudka, 3201 Casa de Palmas, appeared in opposition. He asked questions about the site plan presented, and stated that every time there is a norther, they get garbage in their yards. Mr. Callaway assured Mr. Gudka that they would work towards making sure that does not happen. The public hearing was declared closed. Motion by Canales, seconded by Bertuzzi, that this application for "3-4" General Business District be forwarded to the City Council with the recommendation that it be approved. Motion passed with Bertuzzi, Cook, Meinrath, Noyola, Perez, Serna, Canales and Taylor voting aye, and Hall abstaining. Judy. Houston: 1194-5 REQUEST: From "AB• Professional Office District to •B-1" Neighborhood Business District on Alameda Park, Block 6, Lot 35, located on the east side of Everhart Road, approximately 190 feet south of Avalon Street. Mr. Gunning described the land use and zoning in the surrounding area, and stated that the applicant is requesting a zoning change to "8-1" Neighborhood Business District to operate an Planning Commission Meeting November 30, 1994 Page 6 estate liquidation office with retail options. The property is currently occupied by a vacant building. Mr. Gunning summarized the Staff Report, informing the Commission of applicable Policy Statements. The applicant is requesting a change of zoning to a "B-1" Neighborhood Business District in order to operate an estate liquidation business and associated furniture sales. The associated sales occur when, during an estate liquidation, not all of the items are sold. These items are then brought to the property for display and sale. The subject property has direct access to a major arterial street (Everhart Road) and no direct access to a local residential street. It is adjacent to single-family residences to the east. Across Everhart Road, the residences side onto the street. Adjacent to the north, the area is zoned an "AB" District and developed with offices. The closest business district is along Avalon Street, which is northeast and "caddy-corner" to the subject property. Allowing the business zoning along this portion of Everhart Road would almost ensure that the remaining lots on the blockface would be stripped out with commercial zoning. This blockface is under pressure to convert to commercial zoning. Any change to a business district would accelerate the domino effect; increase the traffic and number of left turns on Everhart Road; and create a high amount of friction with individual commercial driveways to each small lot. To protect the area and reduce the potential of another blockface being commercially stripped, Staff recommends denial of the "B-1" District. It should be noted that the "B-1" District permits sale of alcoholic beverages in conjunction with full food service for restaurant uses. The nature of this type business can also be disruptive to the neighborhood with late hour operations and increased beverage sales, which are not controlled by the City's zoning ordinance. However, a Special Permit for a retail use, clock shop and repair, was granted to the property adjacent to the south in July 1994. Therefore, a Special Permit for a specific retail use would not be detrimental to the area provided that the retail is limited to furniture sales from estate liquidation within the existing structure. The expansion of retail uses onto the subject property would not increase the traffic conflicts since the property is already a nonresidential district with the primary use remaining an office. Twenty four notices were mailed, three were returned in favor and none in opposition. Staff recommends denial of the "B-1" District, and in lieu thereof, approval of a Special Permit for furniture sales subject to the following two (2) conditions: Planning Commission Meeting November 30, 1994 Page 7 1) USE: The only use authorized by this Special Permit other than the basic "AB" Professional Office District uses is furniture sales when associated with the estate liquidation use. The furniture sales use must not exceed a total floor area of 1,200 square feet. Auction sales on the subject property are prohibited. 2) TIME LIMIT: Such Special Permit shall be deemed to have expired within one (1) year of the date of this ordinance unless the property is being used as outlined in condition #1 and in compliance with all other conditions. Ms. Judy Houston, the applicant, appeared and stated that she is the sole owner and operator of her business. She explained her line of business as going to homes and arranging liquidation sales. If items are left, she would like to take them to the Everhart Road location for sale. She added that she would also like to have her office on the subject property, and will comply with City codes for businesses. She was of the opinion that improvements to the building would be an asset to the surrounding area. Commissioner Hall asked Ms. Houston if she was familiar with the conditions of the Special Permit recommended by Staff. Ms. Houston responded in the affirmative, adding that they would be acceptable. In answer to a question from Commissioner Serna, Ms. Houston indicated that she would not display items outside the building. Mr. Harvey asked Ms. Houston if she would limit retail sales only to furniture. Ms. Houston replied that merchandise would include crystal, linen, and other nice pieces, and hoped that she would be allowed to merchandise mixed items. No one appeared in opposition, and the public hearing was declared closed. Commissioner Perez suggested that the word "accessories" be added to the Use Condition of the Special Permit. Motion by Perez, seconded by Cook that this application for "B-1" Neighborhood Business District be forwarded to the City Council with the recommendation that it be denied, and in lieu thereof, approval of a Special Permit for furniture sales subject to the following two (2) conditions: Planning Commission Meeting November 30, 1994 Page 8 1) USE: The only use authorized by this Special Permit other than the basic "AB" Professional Office District uses is furniture sales and accessories when associated with the estate liquidation use. The furniture sales use must not exceed a total floor area of 1,200 square feet. Auction sales on the subject property are prohibited. 2) TIME LIMIT: Such Special Permit shall be deemed to have expired within one (1) year of the date of this ordinance unless the property is being used as outlined in condition $1 and in compliance with all other conditions. Mr. Harvey suggested that "household items" be substituted in the motion for "accessories" . Commissioner Perez amended her motion to substitute "household items" for "accessories" and Commissioner Cook amended her second. Motion passed unanimously. NEW PLATS Consideration of plats as described on attached addendum. TABLED ZONING A. 994-1 Total Recycling Services, Inc. : "I-2" to "I-3" Located on the south side of Recycle Drive, approximately 500 feet east of Manning Road At the applicant's request, this application was tabled until November 30, 1994 to allow time for the FAA to comment on the proposed above-ground fuel storage and proposed recovery and recycle use. Mr. Gunning reviewed this application stating that the applicant is requesting "I-3" zoning to install aboveground storage tanks for bulk storage of combustible fuels for recovery and processing of used oil. The property is currently occupied by a used oil recycling facility. Wholesale storage of petroleum products require an °I-3" District, as well as approval by the Zoning Board of Adjustment as an "Objectionable Use" . Furthermore, the Fire Code requires that aboveground fuel storage tanks be located in an "I-3" District. The aboveground fuel storage tanks are to be used to store used motor oils purchased from area service stations and lube oil retailers. The used oil is blended with higher grade 0 Planning Commission Meeting November 30, 1994 Page 9 fuels to produce a burner fuel for resale to asphalt plants and industrial furnaces. The subject property is situated on a five (5) acre site located approximately 200 feet north of the Tex-Mex Railroad and State Highway 44 (Agnes Street) , and 300 feet east of Manning Road, an arterial. It has 350 feet of frontage on Recycle Drive, its only access, which intersects with Manning Road. It is bounded on the north by agricultural fields, a mud manufacturing plant and crude oil production wells; agricultural fields and undeveloped land to the east; undeveloped land, Tex-Mex Railroad and the Corpus Christi International Airport across S.H. 44 to the south; and a Tex- Mex Railroad spur and auto salvage to the west. The surrounding zoning is an "I-2" Light Industrial District in all directions. The subject property is also located along the northwestern edge of the approach zone of the airport' s main precision instrument runway 13L-31R, and within a designated petroleum hazard area. The applicant is refurbishing the existing structures and aboveground fuel storage tanks moved to the site. According to the applicant, the previous uses included an oil vessel fabrication, aboveground diesel fuel storage, and heavy equipment repair and sales. The existing structures include a 2,100 square foot office building, 12 feet in height; a 12, 800 square foot steel warehouse, 40 feet in height; and 15 aboveground fuel storage tanks varying in height of 16 feet to 21 feet and diameter of 10 feet to 21 feet. The tank storage capacities range from 8,820 gallons to 42, 000 gallons with a total combined capacity of 1,329,300 gallons. The tanks will be placed on concrete slabs located behind the warehouse that fronts on Recycle Drive. The percent of the types of fuels to be stored include 60% used automotive oils, a Class III-A liquid such as diesel; 10% virgin crude, a Class I-A liquid; and 30% in marketable burner fuels, a Class II liquid. The burner fuels are produced by blending the Class I and Class III fuels. No heat producing machinery is required or used in this process. Approximately 10,000 gallons of burner fuel is projected for daily production. The applicant is registered with the Environmental Protection Agency as an approved collection facility and transporter of these products. The main issues related to this use are possible airport hazards and compliance with the Fire Code. The applicant has stated to Staff that all provisions of the Fire Code and National Fire Protection Standards (NFC30) will be met, including diking and retaining walls for containment of fuels *O. 'S Planning Commission Meeting November 30, 1994 Page 10 in case of a spill. However, unless the "I-3" District, as required by the Fire Code for aboveground fuel storage is approved, the applicant would be required to request a variance under an appeal process provided for in the Code. Regarding airport operations, the concern is whether the proposed uses would constitute a hazard to air navigation because of the height of structures or other types of light, electrical or heat that could interfere with landing approaches, pilot vision, air traffic control communications, radar and flight navigation instruments. Due to the site's location within a designated airport runway approach zone, any development on this property must comply with the Corpus Christi Airport Zoning Regulations. Based on the Corpus Christi Airport Zoning Map, the height restriction for new structures on the subject property is 83 feet aboveground level. The existing building and tank structures do not constitute a height obstruction to air traffic approaches, nor appears to interfere with communication or navigation instruments. The Director of Aviation has opposed the approval of an "I-3" District in that it would permit, by right, other possible uses which would be inconsistent with Airport operations. He has also expressed concern with the proposed use in that it presents a possible damage to airport navigation should the tanks explode and carry debris and burning fuels onto the runway. The proposed use is generally consistent with the surrounding land uses located close to a major arterial and railroad, and is situated within a designated petroleum hazard area, the Saxet Oil Fields, well suited for industrial type land uses. There is a consensus that out-right "I-3" zoning would allow other heavy industrial uses not appropriate near an airport. A Special Permit could accommodate the proposed uses while excluding other "I-3" uses which are incompatible and require other conditions to insure that no part of the use would jeopardize airport operations. Compliance with the City's Fire Code is mandatory, including receiving a variance to the required "I-3" District. Furthermore, the applicant would need approval from the Zoning Board of Adjustment as an "Objectionable Use" under Section 21-3 of the Zoning Ordinance. If the Planning Commission desires to consider a Special Permit, Staff recommends the following: Denial of the "I-3" District, and in lieu thereof, approval of a Special Permit for wholesale storage of petroleum products subject to the following conditions: 1) USE: The only use authorized by this Special Permit other than the basic "I-2° Light Industrial District uses `r J Planning Commission Meeting November 30, 1994 Page 11 is wholesale storage of petroleum products limited to the recovery and recycling of used oil. The aboveground fuel storage tanks may be permitted subject to approval of a variance to the Fire Code. 2) WHOLESALE STORAGE OF PETROLEUM PRODUCTS: Wholesale storage of petroleum products must comply with the review and approval process set forth in the Zoning Ordinance as an "Objectionable Use" . This approval must be received before a certificate of occupancy may be issued. 3) TIME LIMIT: Such Special Permit shall be deemed to have expired within one (1) year of the date of this ordinance unless the property is being used as outlined in condition #1 and in conjunction with all other conditions. Mr. Gunning stated that a representative from the FAA has indicated that location of the proposed use on the subject property would not jeopardize funding for the airport. Mr. Charles Cartwright, attorney representing the applicant, appeared and stated that his client made an application for "I-3" zoning because their business is to solve environmental problems. He described their business, as collecting used oil from the community, within five miles, and noted that no heat is used in the mixing process. Mr. Tom Davis, 967 Cantwell Lane, and one of the owners of the business appeared and stated that he has been in business in Corpus Christi for 35 years, and became involved with Total Recycling Services in the last six months. They have built the company and planned for it to fit in with the City' s recycling program, and found the perfect spot to conduct business. They would like to continue their business at this location. Mr. Trent Joins, 4214 Raintree gave technical information about their business to the Commission. He stated that the FAA responded to their request stating that they do not regulate areas around the airport, and, therefore, they could not comment on this application. Mr. Joins added that no complaints have been lodged against them by Baker Hughes. He noted that during the last rains their property was not flooded, and pointed out that across the field there is a company that handles oil. Mr. George Hext, Director of Aviation, appeared in opposition, stating that he wished he could support the rezoning, because they perform a vital function, but he was .i Planning Commission Meeting November 30, 1994 Page 12 concerned about the location of Runway 13L-31R to the subject property. Runway 13L-31R is the primary instrument runway, which lies within a critical zone to the airport. He pointed out that approximately 92% of the time, the wind favors this runway, which establishes its importance. Mr. Hext continued, stating that a second concern is the rapid response time, noting that they are required to be at a site of an accident within 3 minutes. If there was a crash over the subject property, they would not be able to get to it within 3 minutes, and the nearest fire station (Station 13) would take 10-13 minutes to respond. Mr. Hext reviewed airport statistics for 1993-1994, noting the growth of the airport. Mr. Hext informed the Commission that an aircraft which lands on Runway 13L-31R flies directly over the subject property. He was opposed to the zoning request because there could be an accident over the subject property, which contains 1,000,000 gallons of fuel, and there is their inability to respond in a timely manner. Mr. Cartwright again addressed the Commission, informing them that the subject property is the best and only site in Corpus Christi for their operation. There is 12, 000 square feet of slab, 14" thick, which will never allow leaching into the soil. He referred to the Staff's Zoning Report and pointed out Staff' s four reasons in support of the zoning request. Mr. Cartwright noted that noise is a problem around the airport, and this type of industrial use is appropriate in this area; the FAA is not concerned; the use meets all the requirements of the 1980 Airport Zoning Ordinance; and the building has existed for 30 years and has not been a hazard. He requested that the Commission grant the "I-3" zoning; suggested that a Special Permit might be appropriate; and added that if the "I-3" zoning is granted, they would be willing to deed restrict the subject property to the existing use only. The public hearing was declared closed. In reply to questions from Commissioner Hall, Mr. Hext stated that there in nothing on the site that interferes with air navigation, and with the global positioning system that will be coming out soon, there will be better approaches. The concern is the approach to the site, and that there is a one in a million chance that there could be an incident at this point. Mr. Hext added that the property is currently zoned v Planning Commission Meeting November 30, 1994 Page 13 "I-2", and he had no problem with uses that are allowed in the "I-2" District. Vice Chairman Canales commented that he would rather see fuels recycled than end up in the landfill. He was of the opinion that recycling oils has more of a positive impact than chances of a plane coming down. Mr. Hext agreed with Vice Chairman Canales, but stated that as Airport Director, he has to point out the issues that concern him. Discussion followed with Mr. Hest reiterating that the FAA would not take a position on this, and cited near miss incidents at the airport. Mr. Hext also answered clarifying questions. Mr. Harvey pointed out that the use is an "I-3" objectionable use, which has to go to the Zoning Board of Adjustment for final approval before it can be put into operation. He pointed out that hazards in terms of height is not a question, and the Commission should consider appropriate land use. The Zoning Board of Adjustment addresses facility questions, and the Fire Code addresses how the material will be handled. Mr. Harvey also pointed out that deed restrictions would not have City Council control. Motion by Canales, seconded by Hall, that this application for "I-3° Heavy Industrial District be forwarded to the City Council with the recommendation that it be denied, and in lieu thereof that a Special Permit with strict guidelines on the three conditions ae recommended by Staff be approved. Motion passed with Bertuzzi, Cook, Hall, Meinrath, Noyola, Serna, Canales and Taylor voting aye, and Perez voting nay. The meeting recessed at 8:55 p.m. , and reconvened at 9:05 p.m. AMENDMENTS TO DUNE PROTECTION AND BEACH ACCESS PLAN AND REGULATIONS. Mr. Tom Utter, Group Manager, Development Services addressed the Commission, stating that the Plan before the Commission is in total conformity with the State rules and to some degree has been dictated by State Rules. Kleberg County has delegated Dune Protection authority to the City of Corpus Christi, which comes to the Planning Commission. Nueces County will be doing some type of Planning Commission Meeting November 30, 1994 Page 14 dune protection delegation to the City, and the City Council has already approved that authority will be given to the Planning Commission. Mr. Utter gave background information on the Dune Protection Plan, stating that the City Council approved the Plan on the second reading in August 1993 . The only controversial matter was the seawall. He made clear that the City Staff has never suggested closing any part of the beach except that area along the seawall. The City is now suggesting that not any part of the beach be closed to vehicular traffic. The original proposal to have parking on Windward Drive, and a number of alternatives have been tried including the possibility of buying several acres of property between Windward Drive and the seawall for a parking lot. One of the basic problems which still lingers is that the public beach will be 200' back from the tide line. The current plan no longer addresses that issue because a solution cannot be resolved at this time. Mr. Utter continued that the Plan states that none of the beach area will be closed. The Plan sets a dune protection line if Nueces County gives the City dune protection authority. The beach access portion of the plan has been taken out. The GLO has indicated that this Plan is approvable. Staff intends to work with the property owners and interest groups to come up with a better plan. Included in the Plan is the right to close those portions of the beach when the tides get high. The Plan contains a parallel road system which runs parallel to the park road that runs up the beach. Mr. Mic Raasch, City Planner stated that Staff is seeking action on amendments to the Plan, amendments to the Regulations, and a recommendation on the establishment of a Dune Protection Line. Until Nueces County grants dune protection authority to the City, the City of Corpus Christi does not have that authority, however, the City can establish that line contingent on their authority being granted. After numerous negotiations and much discussion with the GLO, Staff has argued that the dune protection line should be at the seawall. Staff is recommending an irregular line for the sake of expediency and in the spirit of cooperation with the GLO and all parties. Staff is recommending that the line be established at the location on the map. Mr. Utter stated that GLO Staff told City Staff what they will approve. Commissioner Bertuzzi asked what are the penalties if a plan is submitted with the line at the seawall. it vl Planning Commission Meeting November 30, 1994 Page 15 Mr. Hart responded that GLO would recommend and justify why the line should be different from what is recommended. After the 60 days for negotiation, there would be fee of $1, 000 per day. Commissioner Hall asked if there is a Dune Protection and Beach Access Regulation Plan currently in effect, and if this plan and regulation will amend it. Mr. Utter responded in the affirmative. Mr. Raasch stated that there are extensive deletions from the vehicular control plan, and Staff is not pursuing restriction of traffic in front of the seawall. The Plan also proposes pedestrian accessways to the beach every 1500' , which is superior to what was previously proposed. Chairman Taylor opened the public hearing. Ms. Elizabeth Walker, 13969 Dos Marinas appeared and quoted from the regulations section of the Plan, page 34. She hoped that it does not take a death in front of the seawall to close that area to vehicular traffic. Mr. Jack Ponton, 38 Rock Creek appeared and stated that he has been on the Dune Protection Committee since its inception. He addressed the area of Mustang Island between the State Park and La Mirage condominiums, which is owned by numerous property owners. He commented on the requirement to provide parking and beach access every 1500 feet, stating that it would require every one of five tract owners to dedicate property to provide access. He was opposed to confiscation or taking of land. Mr. Harvey explained that the Plan does not call for a public beach road access every 1500 feet, but rather it calls for pedestrian access every 1500 feet. It would be a part of the Transportation Plan, and therefore, would be a dedication requirement and a construction requirement similar to providing a local street. The beach is a street, it is a public right-of-way, and in order to get the public to that public right-of-way of the beach, there has to be connecting public rights-of-way. In this case it does not need to be vehicular, but it does need to be pedestrian. Mr. Ponton stated that the Plan calls for a lateral street which may or may not be in the plans of that property owner, and question the 80' right-of-way requirement. Mr. Harvey pointed out that the right-of-way is required to get street and parking, which is required always required even in non-island development. Public parking is even more necessary when Planning Commission Meeting r/ November 30, 1994 Page 16 there will be pedestrian access for the public from the public street. More right-of-way is needed than usual in this case, because shallow and wide drainage ditches will be required. The 80' is more a function of the drainage than parking or thoroughfare. Mr. David Coggins, 13914 Primavera, appeared representing the Padre Island Business Association and addressed the proposed dune protection line. He pointed out that the Plan states that the land between the seawall and Windward Drive does not meet the criteria of critical dunes. He questioned the irregular dune line, and suggested that Staff wait until they receive the authority from the County to set a dune protection line. He questioned who is dictating the dune line, and what is the reason. Mr. Coggins continued that they have supported the Plan through its entirety, but they were not sure that the Plan is balanced. He was of the opinion that the visitor industry is very important to the economy, for that industry to grow, there should be more accommodation for the visitors. Padre Island can be developed to provide more accommodation for visitors. He requested that some one explain the proposed dune protection line. Mr. Utter responded that Staff feels that the verbiage is correct. He explained that the reason for the proposed dune protection line is because that line has been dictated to Staff. The dune protection expert for GLO says that everything outside that line are critical dunes. Staff has appealed to higher authorities in the GLO, but to date, it is still maintained that those are critical dunes. This is the only issue that Staff does not agree with GLO. In response to a question from Commissioner Bertuzzi, Mr. Utter stated that there is written correspondence, and GLO refers to sand transfer. The GLO has worked with Staff exceptionally well, and Staff hopes that GLO will reconsider. Staff does not agree with the proposed line, but Staff is recommending the line in order to have the Plan approved. The deadline for having the Plan approved is 180 days from the date of publication. It would appear that November 1994 is the date for approval, but the latest interpretation from the GLO is that it might be in the future. Mr. Hart interjected that the GLO has not come out with a final ruling as yet. Chairman Taylor asked if the Plan could wait and get approval from the County, and then go from there. Mr. Utter responded that the City has delegation from Kleberg County. If the Planning Commission would like, that portion of the 41910 J Planning Commission Meeting November 30, 1994 Page 17 Plan could be removed. He added that the Planning Commission would oversee everything in Kleberg County and Nueces County except for Dune Protection. The Plan states that once the Counties give the City dune protection authority, that is the established dune protection line. Commissioner Hall stated that he is not ready to vote on something that the GLO wants, and had reservations about approving that line. Mr. Paul Schexnailder, Holiday Inn, Padre Island, appeared and stated that he recently purchased some property under discussion. He asked questions about the Plan, and suggested that the dune protection line be removed from the Plan until the County relinquishes authority. The public hearing was declared closed. Commissioner Serna asked if any other part of the nation is experiencing anything like this. Mr. Utter responded that Padre Island and Texas are unique, and the State of Texas has been lax in Coastal Management. He stated that he does not know of any plan where the area behind the seawall is critical dune. Staff hopes to come back, if this is approved, with a Master Plan proposal for the seawall area that would relieve any property owner behind the seawall from being required to receive dune permits. Staff is not sure that the GLO would approve a Master Plan, although they have indicated that they will favorably consider a Master Plan. Additional information followed regarding the dune protection line, and the definition of "critical dune area" . Mr. Utter informed the Commission that Staff has a copy of the Nueces County Coastal Management Plan dated November 16, 1994. Staff understands that the Plan is going to Commissioners Court on December 7, 1994 . That Plan has the dune protection line at 1, 000' landward mean high tide. That would put the dune protection line that the County is proposing considerably landward of the dune protection line that Staff is proposing. All area behind the seawall would be critical dunes. Mr. Harvey verified that the dune protection line identifies general areas that contain critical dunes. Upon permit review, more detailed information is provided which determines how much and where critical dunes are in the area. Dunes can be destroyed provided it is necessary, and mitigation is provided. Development is not prohibited. Planning Commission Meeting November 30, 1994 Page 18 Motion by Hall, seconded by Meinrath that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution approving the draft of the amendments to the Dune Protection Beach Access Plan, and the amendments to the Dune Protection Beach Access Regulation, with the recommendation to the City Council that the dune protection line be relocated back to the seawall. Motion passed with Bertuzzi, Hall, Meinrath, Serna and Canales voting aye, Cook, Noyola, Perez and Taylor voting nay. OTHER MATTERS Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance 1094-2 - Tee One Up, Inc. Tabled for consideration of a Special Permit. Application will be on City Council Agenda for December 13, 1994. 1094-4 - Southguard Corporation Approved as recommended by Planning Commission. 1293-2 - Dorothy Wilde Approved as recommended by Planning Commission. MATTERS NOT SCHEDULED None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion by Perez, seconded by Bertuzzi and passed unanimously that the minutes of November 2, 1994 be approved. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:25 p.m. Hr7g/// I ala i-a< `-"' o- f ey, A , AICP Marcia Cooper Director of Planning a Development Recording Secretary Executive Secretary to Planning Commission 411. Planning Commission Meeting November 30, 1994 Page 19 NEW PLATS Addendum to minutes of consideration of plate. 1. 1194137-P54 Glen Arbor Subdivision Unit 3, Block 1, Lot lA (Final replat - 14.209 acres) Located east of South Staples Street, south of Curtis Clark Drive and north of Bonner Drive Owner - Southwestern Bell Telephone Engineer - Naismith 2 . 1194138-NP85 Neessen Subdivision, Lot 1 - O.C.L. (Final replat - 3.09 acres) Located south of Oso Creek and east of South Oso Parkway Owner - Phillip Neessen Engineer - Urban 3 . 1194139-NP86 Teachers Credit Union Subdivision, Block 1, Lots 2A & 3 (Vacating Plat - 11.75 acres) Located south of Trojan Drive and west of North Padre Island Drive access road Owner - Nueces County Joint Venture Engineer - Urban 4. 1194140-NP87 Teachers Credit Union Subdivision, Block 1, Lots 5, 6 & 7 (Preliminary - 9.521 acres) Located south of Trojan Drive and west of North Padre Island Drive access road Owner - Nueces County Joint Venture Engineer - Urban 5. 1194141-NP88 Teachers Credit Union Subdivision, Block 1, Lot 5 (Final replat - 9.521 acres) Located south of Trojan Drive and west of North Padre Island Drive access road Owner - Nueces County Joint Venture Engineer - Urban `. .i Planning Commission Meeting November 30, 1994 Page 20 6. 1194143-NP90 Caja Industrial Development, Block 1, Lots 2A & 2B (Final replat - 11.63 acres) Located north of Bear Lane and west of North Padre Island Drive (S.H. 358) Owner - Pierrene H. French Engineer - Govind & Associates 7 . 1194144-NP91 Lexington Plaza, Block B, Lot 26A (Final revlat - 2 .239 acres) Located south of South Padre Island Drive (S.H. 358) west of Weber Road Owner - Baldev Bhakta Engineer - J.L. Brundrett, Jr. No one appeared in favor or in opposition, and the public hearing was declared closed. There being no conditions remaining, motion by Hall, seconded by Cook, and passed unanimously that the above plats be approved as submitted. 8. 1194142-NP89 Cabaniss School Subdivision (Amending Plat) (Final replat - 62 .21 acres) Located south of Saratoga Boulevard (S.H. 357) between Eostoryz Road and Cabaniss Field U.S.N.A.L.F. Owner - CCISD Engineer - Urban Mr. Chuck Urban, Urban Engineering, appeared representing the owner of this plat. He addressed Staff' s requirement to "Require a 10' utility easement adjacent to and parallel with the north side of the 50' road easement on Lot 1, Block 1, and the drainage easement. " Mr. Urban agreed that a 60' ROW would be desirable, and he would be willing to add the additional 10' , but requested that the Commission approve the plat, subject to working out the alignment with Staff. Vice Chairman Canales suggested tabling the plat, so that all questions can be answered, and then a full presentation made at the next regular meeting. Mr. Hart indicated that the Planning Commission could require the 60' dedication on the plat, and let the engineers work out the alignment. it Planning Commission Meeting November 30, 1994 Page 21 Motion by Meinrath, seconded by Perez, that this plat be approved as submitted, including the requirement of a 60' dedication on Ranger Drive. The final alignment where Ranger Drive intersects with Cactus Road is to be determined at a later date. Motion passed with Bertuzzi, Cook, Hall, Meinrath, Noyola, Perez, Serna and Taylor voting aye, and Canales voting nay. 9. 1194136-NP84 Falling Riverside Subdivision, Block 6, Lots 2A & 4A (Final reDlat - 0 .731 acre) Located south of I.H. 37, north of Leopard and east of Callicoatte Road Owner - Walter O. Campos Engineer - Victor Medina Mr. Gunning stated that the owner's engineer has requested that this plat be tabled. Motion by Cook, seconded by Canales and passed unanimously that this plat be tabled. TABLED PLATS Motion by Canales, seconded by Cook, and passed unanimously that the four tabled plats be removed from the Agenda. Commissioner Hall requested that Plat 1094123-P47 be pulled at this time. 1) 1094124-P48 Hopper Addition Unit 2, Lots 17A & 17B, Block 8 (Final replat - 4 .476 acres) Located north of the intersection of South Staples Street with Doddridge Street Owner - City of Corpus Christi Engineer - David A. Pyle 2) 1094134-NP82 Botanical Gardens Park - O.C.L. (Preliminary - 180.779 acres) Located north of South Staples Street (FM2444) and west of the Oso Creek Owner - City of Corpus Christi Engineer - David A. Pyle ti. 'S Planning Commission Meeting November 30, 1994 Page 22 3) 1094135-NP83 Botanical Gardens Park Unit 1, Lots 1, 2 & 3 - O.C.L. (Final replat - 3 .492 acres) Located north of South Staples Street (FM 2444) and west of the Oso Creek Owner - City of Corpus Christi Engineer - David A. Pyle No one appeared in favor or in opposition of the above plats, and the public hearing was declared closed. There being no conditions remaining, motion by Canales, seconded by Perez, and passed unanimously,that the above plate be approved as submitted. 4) 1094123-P47 Hawn Estates, Lots 1A, 1B, 1C, 2A & 2B (Final replat - 2 .25 acres) Located east of Ocean Drive and north of Hewit Drive Owner - Robert Brown & George Hawn, Jr. Engineer - J.R. Brundrett, Jr. In response to a question from Commissioner Hall regarding landscaping and maintenance of the unbuildable lot, Staff stated it would be the property owners responsibility. No one appeared in favor or in opposition, and the public hearing was declared closed. Motion by Canales, seconded by Perez, and passed unanimously that this plat be approved as submitted. (H539MC)